If you have no alternative for things like Japanese knotweed, it should be licenced for certain things. Asulox has been withdrawn for bracken control, and warfarin for squirrel control, and as far as I know there is no alternative to them. Makes control of certain things very difficult, if not impossible.

If small amounts of something are used for specific uses, rather than large amounts being broadcast for all sorts of uses, the amount in the enviromnent will be a lot less.

Was discussing this a bit earlier. I like haing it on hand for the odd job where other things fail. Rather that than spraying an entire arable farm full of roundup-ready crops, and having it drift on the air andinto watercourses, and affect the surface soil from here to Lincoln.

Restricting sales to the public is a blip & in no way addresses the damage it's causing to the environment. When it's still used on herbicide resistant GM crops, on no till cultivations & as a desiccant prior to harvest on many cereal crops.

A number of MEPs had urine samples taken. I can't remember how many subjects but if IRC all of them had traces of glyphosate in their urine.
These are people who don't work in agriculture & come from all over Europe so it's everywhere.
I read somewhere traces have been found in rainfall in certain parts of the USA.
Stopping sales to the public isn't going to stop this but it is sending a message.

I didn't realise it was that widespread in the environment. Of course, if there's trace amounts everywhere all the world's weeds will be busy evolving resistant strains and it will be useless within ten years anyway...

Last edited by Shane on Sun May 22, 16 8:21 am; edited 1 time in total

on a slight tangent their gm boll weevil resistant cotton sets seed and cross fertilises with local strains hence the legal actions against indian peasant farmers for retaining seed.it turned out that M had a flawed case but not before a lot of folk were driven to bankruptcy/suicide.

iirc monsanto's case was flawed in that they didnt have a patent on the f1 retained seed.

back to the plot there are other ways to grow stuff than the glyphosphate method and other ways to eradicate invasive pest species (some less sound than others but less rough on the wider environment)

Last edited by dpack on Sun May 22, 16 8:27 pm; edited 1 time in total

Green MEPs have today received test results confirming the presence of unsafe levels of the ‘probably carcinogenic’ weedkiller glyphosate in their urine.

Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used herbicide. However, glyphosate does more than just kill weeds. In fact, the World Health organisation confirmed last year that the substance is “probably carcinogenic” to humans.

Jean Lambert, MEP for London, Keith Taylor, MEP for the South East, and Molly Scott Cato, MEP for the South West, were among a group of 48 MEPs that took part in a symbolic urine test ahead of the European Parliament vote last month to oppose the EU Commission’s proposal to relicense the controversial toxic substance until 2031.

The inspiration behind what was labelled the #MEPee test was the results of a recent study in Germany which found that 99.6% of people tested were found to have glyphosate residue in their urine.

The results reveal that every MEP tested has been found to have glyphosate traces in their urine, with the average concentration being 1.73ng/ml. That level is more than 17 times the safe limit for drinking water. The lowest level found among the group was 0.17ng/ml, almost double the safe level.

buzzy

Joined: 04 Jan 2011Posts: 3448Location: In a small wood on the edge of the Huntingdonshire Wolds

Green MEPs have today received test results confirming the presence of unsafe levels of the ‘probably carcinogenic’ weedkiller glyphosate in their urine.

Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used herbicide. However, glyphosate does more than just kill weeds. In fact, the World Health organisation confirmed last year that the substance is “probably carcinogenic” to humans.

Jean Lambert, MEP for London, Keith Taylor, MEP for the South East, and Molly Scott Cato, MEP for the South West, were among a group of 48 MEPs that took part in a symbolic urine test ahead of the European Parliament vote last month to oppose the EU Commission’s proposal to relicense the controversial toxic substance until 2031.

The inspiration behind what was labelled the #MEPee test was the results of a recent study in Germany which found that 99.6% of people tested were found to have glyphosate residue in their urine.

The results reveal that every MEP tested has been found to have glyphosate traces in their urine, with the average concentration being 1.73ng/ml. That level is more than 17 times the safe limit for drinking water. The lowest level found among the group was 0.17ng/ml, almost double the safe level.

So does that mean that MEPs are dangerously toxic?

How does anyone who doesn't use Glyphosate accumulate such quantities?

Does it mean that people are accumulating Glyphosate, or accumulating Glyphosate residues (whatever they are)?

How does anyone who doesn't use Glyphosate accumulate such quantities?

Does it mean that people are accumulating Glyphosate, or accumulating Glyphosate residues (whatever they are)?

Are Glyphosate residues as toxic as Glyphosate is alleged to be?

Henry

I've always assumed it's from food residues.
For years we where led to believe Glyphosate broke down rapidly when in contact with soil but that's a myth.
So it's been leaching into groundwater for decades.
I think UK farmers have stopped using it as a desiccant on cereal crops but a lot of the cereals used in the UK are imported.
How dangerous is debatable.
My primary concerns are how much damage it's doing to the environment not human health.
Although with cancer rates rising worldwide we should be questioning (IMHO) if the sum total of modern food production isn't playing a part in that rise.